Deux Arabesque 1

[00range]

Hi! I've been studying the piano for nearly nine months now, and I've decided to take a crack at this piece.

Basically, I'm wondering what kind of time is being used. The music is telling me it is in common, but it doesn't seem to work in it.  For instance, in the first measure, there seems to be six beats, which I'm sure can't be right.

I appreciate any help given, and apologize ahead of time for my ignorance.

[kaff]

On your specific question, the piece is in common time as you suggest, but the notes are organised in triplets rather than pairs of quavers.  A triplet is a group of three notes which fits into the time normally occupied by two such notes in the given time signature. 

More generally, this is a very beautiful piece as I'm sure you already know from listening to recordings; but it would be unusual for someone who had only been learning for 9 months to be able to do it justice.  I'm not suggesting that you should absolutely not attempt it, just that you should be prepared to find it very very challenging.  It would be a shame to put yourself off it by attempting it too early.

Kathryn

[00range]

I am finding it quite challenging, but then, I've always been one to jump right into the deep end, and I haven't drown yet! It is indeed a gorgeous piece, and I do hope to do it justice, eventually. Right now, I'd be happy with simply being able to go through it's motions, for my own personal enjoyment. The delicate touch required for this piece is beyond me, but I'll get there, and when I do, I might as well have this piece ready for it.

Thank you for answering my question, but I'm afraid it only sparks more questions (big surprise ). For starters, how would one go about counting these triplets? Is this entire piece composed using this method? Is there an easy way to identify triplets?

I will most certainly be asking a few questions regarding the piece in my upcoming lesson, but I'll be honest, I'd like to go into my lesson with a rudimentary understanding of the subject, if at all possible; can anyone say brownie points? 

Thanks again Kathryn.

[kaff]

Me again.  How to recognise triplets: there are two ways.  The easy way is by the little "3" written above or below each set of three notes, which you should find in the first bar.  Depending on what edition you are using, this little "3" won't be repeated right through the piece - you're expected to assume it.  The second way needs some knowledge of music theory.  You know that common time means 4 crotchet beats to the bar, yes?  (Crotchet is the English term for quarter note; bar is the English word for measure), which means 8 quavers (eighth notes) to the bar?  So if you see a piece like this where the time signature is common time but there are 12 quavers in each bar, grouped in threes, then you can work out that they must be triplets.  It's important not to confuse triplets in common time with quavers grouped in threes in compound time (in other words, if the bottom number of the time signature is an 8 rather than a 4, then quavers grouped in threes won't be triplets). 

If the last sentence just confused you completely, then you'll be doing yourself a big favour if you set about learning some music theory to go along with the actual playing.  Ask your teacher, or do a search on this forum for good, basic theory books - topic has been discussed several times.

Okay - back to Debussy.  How to count triplets. 3 notes to one beat, instead of 2.  Simple as that.  The BIG difficulty in this piece comes from bar 6 onwards, where the quavers in the right hand are in triplets while the quavers in the left hand are just ordinary quavers.  That means for every three notes you play in the right hand, you play two in the left hand.  It's tempting to try to get round this by playing the left hadn quavers long-short-long short- so that you can fit them together with the right hand triplets, but that is completely wrong - the quavers have to be all even, so that your hands are playing at different times. It's this musical device which gives the piece its rich, lush texture.  It's also likely to be the thing that has you needing mouth-to-mouth as you find yourself finally going under...

Anyway, good luck.  Let us know how you get on.  If your teacher suggests it's a bit beyond you for the moment, ask for his/her advice on something else a bit easier but which has similar qualities to the Arabesque.  You might like a piece called "Sleeping Cat" by Alan Hovhaness, from a volume of music called The Sketchbook of Mr Purple Poverty. It's a much shorter, easier piece, but it's got a haunting, dreamy quality not unlike the Arabesque.

Kathryn

[00range]

Aha! Thank you very much.

Theory is actually one of strong suits, keeping in mind my limited time of study, so what you're saying makes sense.

One question that comes to mind, is where I place the "extra" beat in the equation. Am I to divide the time between beats into thirds, which seems logical to me, or is there something I'm overlooking?

For example:

If  the |'s represent clicks on a metronome, with *'s being notes played...

|             |              |             |
*  *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Would this be an accurate depiction of how to count triplets?

Also, from bar 6 and on, if the left hand is ordinary quavers, does this mean that the eigth notes on the left hand are going to fall in the middle of the latter note in the right hand triplet?

If I add my little diagram... with !'s being quavers...

|             |              |             |
*  *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
!     !       !      !      !       !      !


Thanks for the help Kathryn, and the reccomendation of the piece, I'll definitely check it out, though I am rather set on giving the Arabesque a shot; I think I could stand to learn a great deal from it.

[kaff]

Yes, to both questions. 

Kathryn

[00range]

Excellent! Thank you ever so much, you've been the utmost of help.